“New scientific discoveries are casting doubt on how much of the warming of the twentieth century was natural and how much was man-made, and governments around the world are beginning to confront the astronomical cost of reducing emissions. Economists, meanwhile, are calculating that the cost of slowing or stopping global warming exceeds the social benefits.”
So spoke Senator James Inhofe on the Senate floor on May 17th, reading into the record the mission statement of the climate conference he was scheduled to be speaking at that very moment. Rather than addressing the Monday lunch session of Heartland’s Fourth International Conference on Climate Change, the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works remained in Washington, responding to the prior week’s Kerry-Lieberman “climate bill” proposal.
Had the mainstream media acted responsibly, then every word spoken at the first major post-Climategate climate colloquium would have indeed built public awareness of the implausibility of manmade global warming and, consequently, any job-killing legislation, treaties or regulations designed to “control” it. But ours is an agenda-driven MSM – brazenly toting water for a president and Hill Democrats shamelessly rolling out the Gulf-coast disaster crash-cart to reanimate their flat-lined “climate” bill.
Mine is the task of summarizing – to the best of my ability — the current state of climate reality, as espoused before me one month ago by no less than the greatest minds analyzing the subject today. And yours is the opportunity to quickly absorb the collective wisdom of over 75 experts speaking at 5 plenary and 20 breakout sessions, and countless marvelous conversations, all spread over 3 days. And to discover or affirm the myriad inconvenient truths behind the “global warming” hype.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“”” Patrick Davis says:
June 21, 2010 at 8:10 am
“Bill in Vigo says:
Old military saying ” 7 P’s”
1. Proper
2. Prior
3. Planing
4. Prevents
5. Piss
6. Poor
7. Performance
This always worked for us. It seems that both parties involved BP and the federal government must have missed one of the P’s in this case.
Bill Derryberry”
Excluding the BP issue, these, military “P’s”, didn’t seem to work on many occasions as history records. “””
History records that Military Plans remain operational up until the time one first encounters the enemy.
The saddest part about Military History, is that it never records; what WOULD HAVE HAPPENED if that planning had never been done.
Bill, if you are quite happy to see your son or daughter go off to battle with no planning beforehand; well I suppose that is a choice you and they could have.
As I recall, the most elaborate, expensive, and thoroughly designed automatic pre-programmed piece of machinery in history to that date; when push came to shove; it was too stupid to see that it was going to Put Neil Armstrong down on a pile of rocks from which it would surely have toppled over to remain there forever.
So a properly trained and skilled human had to take over from the planning, and steer the craft safely to a suitable landing site.
You see in the planning stages, skilled and dedicated people learn to deal with the unexpected when it arises; and that is the way things are planned.
Well the above is addressed to Patrick Davis; my apologies Bill.
Funny thing now that the globe continues on its merry way to incineration. CO2 the last few years has actually leveled off thanks in large part to recessions in the US and Europe. But more importantly, none of the effects of the so-called positive feedbacks seem to be occuring. While the Artic shows positive temp anomalies (thanks mainly to a negative AO brought about by volcanoes), much of the northern Hemisphere shows neutral to negative anomalies temp wise. Here in the US, powerful storms continue to advect cooler Candadian continental polar air masses equatorward. And with these storms come copious amount of rain -so much so that large portions of the bread basket haven’t got thier bean crops planted. This isn’t suppose to happen -niether early spring invasions of polar air masses nor large attendent rainfall patterns are suppose to occur. The amplification of the Hadley Cell because of higher than normal CO2 concentrations are supposed to lead to the desertification of much of the mid-latitudes. This obviously hasn’t occured. Go on over to Europe, and one doesn’t see any large regional drough patterns. As a matter of fact long range models indicate that Eastern Europe will see a rathe large drop in temps this coming winter.
I see in the medium range (2-3 years out), a drop in global temps due to continued cooling of the equatorial Pacific, North Pacific and Central Atlantic.
Thanks, George E. Smith. part of that proper prior planning is most definitely training training and more training.
Patrick for the most part military planning is very careful because the life you lose might be your own. The biggest problem is that the first three P’s are usually replaced by,
1. Previous
2. Political
3. Purpose
Which in a society like ours where the politicians control the actions of the military trumps the other first three. That leads to a change in the last 4 to
Promotes
Piss
Poor
Performance
Bill Derryberry
bob paglee says: June 21, 2010 at 8:50 am
Here’s a good summary by Dr. Jay Lehr, Sci Director , Heartland Inst.:
Significant Evidence that Mankind Has an Insignificant Impact on the Climate of Planet Earth
What’s missing in the summary is mention of the evidence of widespread degradation of Science, and the evidence that when the science is done properly, the proxy temperature records, as well as the thermometer records, show no evidence for AGW.
there is a lay explanation of the physics underlying climate alarmism. KE Research, a German public policy consultancy firm, prepared the report based on interviews and editing assistance from noted German theoretical physicists Ralf D. Tscheuschner & Gerhard Gerlich, authors of the peer-reviewed paper Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects within the Frame of Physics, and numerous other climatologists, physicists, and scientists at
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/06/rescue-from-climate-saviors.html
Conclusions of the report include:
The terms “greenhouse effect” and “greenhouse gas” are misnomers and obstruct understanding of the real world.
Earth has a natural “cooling system”. If the planet warms, it will automatically raise its cooling power.
An increase of earth temperatures is only achievable if the heating power is stepped up: first to “load” matter with more energy (i.e. to raise temperatures) and then to compensate for the increasing cooling, which results from the increase of IR radiation into space.
CO2 and other IR-active gases cannot supply any additional heating power to the earth. Therefore, they cannot be a cause of “global warming”. This fact alone disproves the greenhouse doctrine.
The “natural greenhouse effect” (increase of earth temperatures by 33°C) is a myth.
IR-active gases do not act “like a blanket” but rather “like a sunshade”. They keep a part of the solar energy away from the earth’s surface.
IR-active gases cool the earth: 70% of the entire cooling power originates from these molecules. Without these gases in the air, the surface and the air immediately above the ground would heat up more.
The notion that a concentration increase of IR-active gases would impede earth’s cooling is impossible given the true mechanisms explained above.
As a consequence the very foundation of the “Green Tower of Climate Dogma” crumbles. Computer models alleging to forecast warming based on “greenhouse effects” are worthless, and any speculation about the “impact of climate change” accordingly dispensable.
Since the greenhouse hypothesis has been disproven by the laws of physics, it is only a matter of time until the truth becomes public opinion.
Does anyone with expertise have any comments on the contents of that report?
Why in that article in PDO graph there has been made copy paste of cool PDO from 1945-1977 to end of graph, is there some science behind that or is it just illustration of how it perhaps should be cool?
I think that AGW views are rather impossible to agree on many points, but also I have found that climate realists are sometimes pushing things bit too much, I’m now worried a bit if such graph is something someone created just by copy paste and without any scientific evidence backing it up, then there are dangers of being as ridiculous as some AGW articles have been.
I do know that PDO indeed shifts, but I doubt there will ever be two identical cold PDO’s like in that graph.
Just something that did catch my eye.
In whole climate issue, it would be best to take step back, examine what really is the truth and after that decide what is best course of action, when looking big picture there has been times before man when there has no been ice at poles, that it is silly to think that current climate would be anything normal or standard for this planet, there has been times when has been ice ages, like last 2 million years, when cold and ice has been dominant, but always temperatures will eventually rise and almost all ice disappears unless some event interrupts the process. In this light it is bit silly that some are claiming catastrophy will come based on last 150 years, it is like taking one frame from high speed camera and trying to figure out which direction ball is running.
Some people jumped the gun and those we are calling alarmists, now realists should be careful not jumping the gun too, it is always danger when running at front edge of information. Good scientist is always skeptical about everything, by questioning his views he is able to find evidence of what is reality, so always it is good to sit into another corner of room and take another look, try to make theory fail, if it still holds it might be good one.
That is also something I have seen falling down in climate science during the years. It is good that we have Anthony and other that try to wake up this lost scientific touch, hopefully it is again some day a standard also in climate science.
A post-climategate consensus sounds like a post-EU Constitution consensus. I’m not sure it can be done, until the money spigot is turned off.
Lucy Skywalker says:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
bob paglee says: June 21, 2010 at 8:50 am
Here’s a good summary by Dr. Jay Lehr, Sci Director , Heartland Inst.:
Significant Evidence that Mankind Has an Insignificant Impact on the Climate of Planet Earth
What’s missing in the summary is mention of the evidence of widespread degradation of Science, and the evidence that when the science is done properly, the proxy temperature records, as well as the thermometer records, show no evidence for AGW.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Lucy, you have a very good point, but the best things about Dr. Lehr’s summary are that it is very thorough, is based simply on scientific principles and does not cast aspersions, even some that are very well deserved. It presents just the unvarnished facts, and should be required reading for all those school children who were exposed to Al Gore’s convenient falsification, except perhaps in England, where a sensible judge required a warning notice to accompany it.
Bob
Question: What are the chances an infinitesimal (.04%) trace gas (CO2), essential to photosynthesis and therefore life on this planet, is responsible for runaway Global Warming?
Answer: Infinitesimal
The IPCC now agrees. See the IPCC Technical Report section entitled Global Warming Potential (GWP). And the GWP for CO2? Just 1, (one), unity, the lowest of all green house gases (GHG). What’s more, trace gases which include GHG constitute less than 1% of the atmosphere. Of that 1%, water vapor, the most powerful GHG, makes ups 40% of the total. Carbon dioxide is 1/10th of that amount, an insignificant .04%. If carbon dioxide levels were cut in half to 200PPM, all plant growth would stop according to agricultural scientists. It’s no accident that commercial green house owner/operators invest heavily in CO2 generators to increase production, revenues and profits. Prof. Michael Mann’s Bristle cone tree proxy data (Hockey stick) proves nothing has done more to GREEN (verb) the planet over the past few decades than moderate sun-driven warming (see solar inertial motion) together with elevated levels of CO2, regardless of the source. None of these facts have been reported in the national media. Why?
What do you make of this?
Very large holes in the ozone layer over the Antarctic continent predicted by NASA during the years 2007-2017. “Our current predictions right now [are] that . . . [f]or about the next ten years or so [2007 – 2017], we’ll see very large ozone holes. Then after about 2017 or 2018 in there, [the ozone holes will] start getting smaller and smaller and smaller. By 2070 [the ozone layer] should be back to a 1980 level.” (Dr. Paul Newman, senior atmospheric physicist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, quoted in Maria Frostic, “Exploring Ozone,” Ozone Resource Page, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC, October 19, 2007, Track 1:57)
Frank